Re: BOOT_TARGET pImage & uImage ???

On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 02:22:28PM -0400, Brian Waite wrote:

quoted

What I want is three things:
1) The 'mkimage' target must be done in such a fashion that it will
never run into a 'cannot execute' problem. My suggestion is to have
the Makefile do a:
@chmod +x mkimage.sh
Or so. In 2.5/2.6, the build system will handle this for you,
automagically, on .sh files I believe. For 2.4, you must handle this
explicitly.

Altough messy, I make this happen in the patch I supply. I can change
it to do the straight chmod in the scrip[ts directory if that is
cleaner.

I think what your patch does is the 2.6 logic, so that's probably best.

quoted

2) Do we really need 'pImage' and 'uImage' or can we just have
'uImage' ?

I think uImage is enough. Wolfgang strongly discourages any use of
PPCBoot these days and it just seems silly.

That what I figured at this point.

quoted

3) I really (really!) want a patch for 2.4 and 2.5/2.6 at the same
time.

This was one of the reasons for not supplying the patch previously. I
will try to pull together a 2.5/2.6 patch but I have not worked under
2.5/2.6 at all. When I initially did the 2.4 patch I pulled the 2.5
tree but I didn't have time to understand the layout. Also, unless
someone has a board that will boot a uImage target I can only supply
an untested patch. I'll take some time and see if I can pull something
I am comfortable with in the next few days. Is there anyone who could
help with testing?

'Untested' is fine here, since all you have to do to test is have the
'uImage' target work.  A minimal config based on arch/ppc/defconfig
should suffice for this.

--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/